Riinvest Institute 2014

10  Op. cid. – A Modern Tale
11 VSSM - Strategic Assessment of Environmental Impact http://
www.kuvendikosoves.org/?cid=1,191,632 http://www.kuvend-
ikosoves.org/?cid=1,191,334
of 40 years. How can we see their effect, as well as 
how can we plan the additional generation without 
having clear picture of how the alternative sector of 
renewable energy will develop, that of gas, oil, syn-
thetic fuels etc. These issues need to be constant-
ly debated by experts from various fields. A broad 
public debate must be kept in motion all the time, 
because the energy and mining sector are constant-
ly evolving and require multidisciplinary expertise.
Kosovo’s mineral potential is a double-edged 
sword: if we want to use it for our benefit, we have to 
firstly ensure transparency and above all account-
ability from all those who have the political mandate 
to project its future. However, if it proceeds with the 
same pace, with quick ideas, kept away from pub-
lic discussion, with lots of outside interference, and 
without long-term strategic plans, the development 
potential could turn into a potential for permanent 
crisis both inside and outside Kosovo, especially to-
wards our European perspective.
The sale of the distribution division of KEK, the 
failure of three tenders for new generators, harm-
ful procurement and the spending of more than a 
billion euros of investment in the sector, without 
lasting effect, make the sector very vulnerable. 
The first responsibility of political leaders is to be 
transparent to the end and collaborative to ensure 
full implementation of international conventions 
especially of the Aarhus, and European “AQUIT” 
which regulate the issue of public participation in 
decision-making.

---

12
n
The privatization process in Kosovo must be treat-
ed from two perspectives due to the specific nature of 
ownership of the two different groups of enterprises 
in Kosovo as well as since the privatization process-
es in the respective groups have been managed by 
different institutions. The first group represents social 
enterprises, which primarily operated in competitive 
markets. Whereas, the second group represents pub-
lic enterprises that mainly provide public services, 
especially at national level where the privatization 
process is still ongoing.
Regarding social enterprises, the privatization pro-
cess has started in 1989 under the Law on Social Cap-
ital of the former Yugoslav Federation. Nevertheless, 
the number of companies that have gone through this 
process has been very small, mainly from the region 
of Gjakova. At that time, the privatization process was 
interrupted quickly due to the onset of violent mea-
sures that followed the abolition of Kosovo’s autono-
my. During this period, thousands of employees were 
laid off; companies were stripped of their assets and 
investments were lacking. The real privatization pro-
cess started after the war, in 2002, and was managed 
by the Kosovo Trust Agency (KTA), continuing under 
the framework of the Privatization Agency of Kosovo 
(PAK) after the country’s independence.
12
12 Regarding the course of the privatization process of socially 
The privatization process of these enterprises man-
aged by of KTA and later PAK was accompanied by 
contradictions and marked problems. Initially, the 
process of privatization has been treated, by UNMIK 
and Kosovo institutions afterwards, as an end in itself 
and has not been part of a long-term strategy for eco-
nomic development. Decisions on the privatization 
process before independence were made within a 
closed institutional environment which, one could 
argue, did not show an appropriate representative 
character. Even after independence, this process has 
continued in a similar way. Although the process went 
pretty well for several years, it was stopped several 
times, either because of legal problems caused by 
Serbia, or as a result of delays in the transfer of power 
to the PAK.
Regardless whether the process continued or was 
interrupted, the lack of real transparency associated 
with this process has been chronic. Moreover, there 
was a lack of proper reporting procedures and trans-
parency towards investors, the general public and 
national institutions (government and assembly) (RI-
INVEST/Forum 2015, 2008). Although, the applied 
methods of privatization of socially owned enterpris-
es in Kosovo, theoretically, create less discretion 
owned enterprises in Kosovo see RIINVEST (2001, 2002), and 
RIINVEST / Forum 2015 (2004a, 2004b, 2008).